Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757932AbXFVP3e (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:29:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757235AbXFVP30 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:29:26 -0400 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:33370 "EHLO sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756735AbXFVP3Z (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:29:25 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:29:15 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Chris Wright , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt] CONFIG_PARAVIRT and CONFIG_MCOUNT don't play well together Message-ID: <20070622152915.GQ3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <20070622080634.GP3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <20070622083330.GB19382@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070622083330.GB19382@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1505 Lines: 29 * Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote: > * Chris Wright wrote: > > Current -rt is broken when compiling with CONFIG_PARAVIRT and > > CONFIG_MCOUNT both enabled. Because CONFIG_MCOUNT disables > > CONFIG_REGPARM, the calling convention must once again be explicit > > with fastcall. However, this was only half-way addressed in the -rt > > patch (adding fastcall back to paravirt_ops function ptr declaration > > but not the actual function definitions) so the compiled kernel has > > caller putting stuff in registers and callee pulling things from the > > stack. Impressive how far into boot it can get despite that ;-) Thanks > > to Steven Rostedt for prodding me and starting the initial debugging. > > thanks! I ran into this before and asked for the fastcalls to not be > removed from upstream paravirt.c but to no avail it seems. It does no > harm to anyone to keep the 'fastcall' declarations and definitions for > places where _actual assembly code_ depends on the calling convention. > Could someone please send this upstream-wards too? Yes, I agree, it's actually documenting the subtlety of the calling convention, not just noise in the source. The upstream patch is different, I'll sort one out. thanks, -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/